1

Federalizing Bridge Preservation

California's Plan

Michael B. Johnson P.E.

California Department of Transportation

Western Bridge Preservation Partnership

May 2012

2

Federal Authority

FHWA Policy Memo dated October 8, 2004

“Timely preservation activities are necessary to ensure proper performance of the transportation infrastructure”

FHWA should, “proactively work with their state partners” to develop preservation programs.

“Final eligibility determination should be the result of collaboration between the division and State DOT”.

“FHWA supports the increased flexibility of using Federal-aid funding for cost-effective preventive maintenance”.

3

Federal Constraints

FHWA Policy Memo dated October 8, 2004

“In no way shall preventive maintenance projects adversely impact the safety of the traveled way”

“Capacity increasing projects are not considered preventive maintenance”.

Legislative Constraints

Title 23 U.S.C 116 (d) – requires a sound inspection program and “systematic process” such as bridge management to identify eligible work activities”

4

Systematic Process

FHWA guidance related to evaluating the systematic process (FHWA bridge preservation guide).

1. How are the needs identified?

2. Prioritize the needs

3. Have remedy to address need

4. Define outcome or goal

5. Define resources needed to achieve goal

6. Define time frames

7. Demonstrate cost effectiveness

8. Demonstrate extension of life

9. Dedicate adequate resources

5

Systematic Process Challenges

The following are the tough systematic process items to

achieve:

1. Prioritize the needs

2. Demonstrate cost effectiveness

3. Demonstrate extension of life

6

The Caltrans Plan

Preservation needs are primarily identified by inspectors during a bridge inspection.

Inspectors place a priority on every work recommendation based on their field inspection.

Inspectors are all licensed engineers.

Federalized bridge preservation activities are managed and resourced just as any other project.

Benefits of activities in the plan are intuitive and backed up by the Pontis Bridge Management System models.

Cost effectiveness and life extension can be evaluated using Pontis.

7

The Caltrans Plan

We defined nine bridge preservation activities: Concrete Deck Overlays

Concrete Deck Crack Sealing

Concrete Deck Rehabilitation

Full and Spot Steel Painting

Joint Seal Repair or Replacement

Scour Mitigation

Bridge Mechanical & Electrical Repair

Superstructure Strengthening

Steel Fatigue Mitigation

8

Example Activity

Activity: Joint Seal Replacement

Purpose: Properly functioning joint seals prevent the

accumulation of material in the joint that could restrict

thermal movement of the bridge or lead to corrosion of steel

members. Restricted thermal movements are know to cause

considerable damage to both superstructure and substructure

components.

Eligibility: Bridge joint seal elements in condition states 2, 3

or 4 are eligible.

Prioritization: Urgency identified by the inspector during the

inspection will be used to prioritize.

9

Example Activity

Activity: Superstructure Strengthening

Purpose: Strengthening provides a viable alternative to

replacement for bridges with lesser load capacity but

otherwise in good condition.

Eligibility: Bridges with load carrying capacity to demand

ratios of less than 1.0 at the operating level. A current load

rating is required.

Prioritization: Priority will be given to lower capacity to

demand ratios and then to higher ADTT’s.

The Caltrans Plan – Other Lessons

Other components of the Caltrans Plan:

Programmatic exception to geometric design and

safety standards.

Exemption from the “10 Year Rule” for the use of

HBP funding.

Unsuccessfully sought single item FTIP listing

for the program.

Summary

Bridge preservation activities are cost effective and can be funded with HBP funds.

Gaining Preservation Plan approval requires a systematic process of management be in place.

Communication with the FHWA Division office is a critical components.

Bridge management systems such as Pontis can satisfy several tough program “tests”.

Even with approval, the funding requires additional project overhead that reduces the overall effectiveness.